18 01 2006

It was reported that, in accordance with Standing Orders, Councillor Searle had been nominated to attend this meeting in place of Councillor Davis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Apologies for inability to attend the meeting were submitted on behalf of the Mayor

 

and Councillor Davis.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RESOLVED: That the Minutes of the Board meeting held on 9 November 2005 be approved and signed by the Chairman as a true and correct record.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consideration was given to a report of the Financial Services Manager (a copy of which is affixed in the Minute Book as Appendix “A”), which sought Council’s approval to the content of the report, which included the prudential indicators and limits for 2006 – 2007.

 

 

 

Members were advised that the report covered the operation of the Council’s prudential indicators, its treasury function and its likely activities for the forthcoming year.   The report incorporated the following key Council reporting requirements:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In conclusion it was reported that the formulation of a plan or strategy for the control of the authority’s borrowing, investments or capital expenditure was a function reserved for the Council.  Hence this Board’s required recommendation to the next Council meeting.

 

RECOMMENDED: That Council approve the Financial Services Manager’s report on (a) the Treasury Management Strategy for 2006/07 – 2008/09, and (b) the limits/prudential Indicators referred to in the report for 2006/07:

 

·        capital expenditure projections (para. 2.5)

·        capital financing requirement projections (para. 2.6)

·        authorised and operational borrowing limits (para. 3.4)

·        affordability prudential indicators (paras. 4.2 – 4.8)

·        treasury management prudential indicators (page 6/10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NOTE: During the debate on this item Councillor Hayward declared a personal and prejudicial interest and subsequently withdrew from the meeting and took no further part in the discussion or voting thereon.

 

 

 

Prior to the consideration of the Financial Services Manager’s report on Relate Portsmouth and District’s request for financial funding it was reported that notice of a deputation had been received from Mrs Jackie Buckley, Centre Manager, Relate Portsmouth and District for her and Samantha Gurnah (Trustee) to address the Board meeting on this item. 

 

 

 

 

Mrs Buckley accordingly thanked the Board for the opportunity to address them and stated that her remit covered Portsmouth, Gosport, Havant, Fareham and East Hampshire.  She wished to appraise the Board of Relate’s operation and how it affected Gosport.  The issues that affected Gosport’s residents were:

 

 

 

·        Communication

 

 

 

She had looked at the Borough Council’s website and particularly the strategy documents and in this context she referred to “Homelessness”.  Relate contributed significantly to this strategy as it dealt with relationship breakdown, teenage conception, poverty and transport.  Relate had two sessions per week at the Harbourside Cancer Centre facility within Gosport Bus Station.

 

 

 

For a Relate session there was a charge of £40 but this was reduced according to an individual’s ability to pay.  From April – December 2005 there had been 295 sessions held for Gosport residents.  92 clients attended these sessions; of these clients 38 were couples and 16 were individuals.  Relate had overspent by £1,500 this year therefore Mrs Buckley requested an increase in the allocation to £7,000 to ensure they could continue the present level of service to Gosport residents.

 

Hampshire County Council had turned down a request from them for financial support.  However they had agreed to some funding towards the cost of family counselling in the area outside Portsmouth.  Further discussion had taken place with Social Services and they would fund Gosport residents on a pro-forma basis.  The Navy would also fund Gosport residents if they had a Naval background.

 

Following Mrs Buckley’s presentation members of the Board questioned her on the operation of her service and the finances required to sustain it.  Mrs Buckley duly left the meeting for the members to consider her presentation and the Financial Services Manager’s report. 

 

Members accordingly considered the Financial Services Manager’s report (a copy of which is affixed in the Minute Book as Appendix “B”).  The Manager advised that the Council had a three year service level agreement with Relate that was now in its final year.  The agreement provided annual funding to Relate, at a capped level, in return for an agreed level of provision.  Relate had requested a continuation of the existing service level agreement for a further three years with an increase to £7,000 from its present level of £4,800 to continue the service. 

 

The Manager had accordingly appended to his report, Relate’s service level agreement, grant request letter and Statement of Financial Activities 2004/2005.  Members debated the content of the presentation and the Manager’s report and expressed their concern regarding the lack of funding from other agencies.  They felt that if Relate did manage to attract further funding from the County Council and the Navy then perhaps the Council’s contribution could be reduced.

 

RESOLVED:  That -

 

(i) a maximum of £7,000 be paid to Relate for a further year, with a subsequent review of Relate’s funding requirements being reported back to the Board; and

 

(ii) the £7,000 be paid to Relate on a periodical basis throughout the year.

 

 

 

Consideration was given to a report of the Leisure and Cultural Services Manager on the Falkland Gardens new public convenience facility.

 

The proposed new facility in the Falkland Gardens sought to improve the service provision by providing a new public convenience in a more suitably located position in the Gardens.  The recommendation before Members sought approval to a virement to utilise a sum of £100,000 from the now terminated Bridgemary Healthy Living Centre project to fund a new public convenience facility.

 

RESOLVED:  That approval be given to a virement of £100,000 within the Council’s Capital Programme to provide and install a new public convenience facility at the Falkland Gardens.

 

 

(A) Orlit Homes Redevelopment, disposal of site to RSL Partners.

 

Consideration was given to a cross - reference from the Housing Board (11 January 2006) concerning the above matter.

 

RESOLVED:  That approval be given to the disposal of the Orlit Properties, together with associated garden land, to Portsmouth Housing Association and Hermitage Housing Association for no consideration and on terms to be agreed.

 

(B) Disposal of 79 Avery Lane

 

Consideration was given to a cross - reference from the Housing Board (11 January 2006) concerning the disposal of 79 Avery Lane. 

 

RESOLVED:  That approval be given to the disposal of 79 Avery Lane on the open market.

 

 

 

By reason of special circumstance, the Chairman determined that this item be considered at this meeting notwithstanding the fact that the item had not been available for public inspection in accordance with the provisions of Section 100 B (4) (a) of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

 

The special circumstance for consideration of this item at this time was that the Council as one of the interested parties had to submit its views on the proposed merger by 31 January 2006.

 

Councillor Kimber was allowed to address the Board on this matter in accordance with Standing Orders 3.7.2 (c) and 3.7.3.

 

Accordingly consideration was given to a report of the Gosport Voluntary Action and Gosport Development Trust merger proposal December 2005 (a copy of which is affixed in the Minute Book as Appendix “C”).  The report detailed the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed merger, functions and activities aligned to the two organisations together with the related funding and finance. 

 

RESOLVED:  That Council support the proposed merger between Gosport Voluntary Action and Gosport Development Trust and the current level of funding for both organisations be retained for 2006/07 – 2007/08.

 

 

 

 

 

By reason of special circumstance, the Chairman determined that this item be considered at this meeting notwithstanding the fact that the item had not been available for public inspection in accordance with the provisions of Section 100 B (4) (a) of the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985. 

 

The special circumstance for consideration of this item at this time was that the Council had to respond to the Strategic Health Authority (SHA) on the above matter by 31 January 2006. 

 

Councillor Edgar was allowed to address the Board on this matter in accordance with Standing Orders 3.7.2 (c) and 3.7.3.  Prior to Councillor Edgar’s presentation the Board was informed that Mrs Edgar had been taken ill and in the circumstances the Board wished Mrs Edgar a speedy recovery.

 

Accordingly consideration was given to Councillor Edgar’s report on the Acute Paediatric Services Review in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight (a copy of which is affixed in the Minute Book as Appendix “D”).  The SHA had recently commissioned the Office for Public Management to undertake a review of the Acute Paediatric Services in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight.  The review was led by Sir Cyril Chantler, Chair of Great Ormond Street Hospital and Doctor Sarah Harvey, Director of Health and Social Care at the Office for Public Management.

 

The review team had visited the acute paediatric units in Basingstoke, Winchester, Southampton, Portsmouth and the Isle of Wight to hear presentations and to visit the units.  Focus groups were held with parents and carers to listen to families and children who had used the services.  Further data and information was collated from each unit for analysis.

 

The report was now completed and the Strategic Health Authority wanted organisations within the NHS family and its partners to respond to it by 31 January 2006.  Councillor Edgar had drafted a Gosport Borough Council response under the following headings:

 

 

The report concluded that it was very important that the problems of access from Gosport to the acute care and A & E facilities at Queen Alexandra Hospital were recognised by the provision of extra resources on the peninsula.  There was no doubt that an enhanced paramedic service and easily accessible facilities locally would ensure that children with worrying symptoms or injuries could be assessed and treated as soon as possible.

RESOLVED:  That Council support Councillor Edgar’s draft observations under “Gosport Borough Council Response” in his report, for onward transmission to the Strategic Health Authority.

 

 

 

RESOLVED:  That under Section 100 (A) (4) of the Local Government Act 1972, the public be excluded from the meeting for the under-mentioned item of business on the grounds that it involves the likely disclosure of exempt information as defined in paragraph 9 of Part I of Schedule 12A of the Act.

 

 

 

Consideration was given to an exempt report of the Head of Property Services on the above matter. 

 

RESOLVED:  That approval be given to the sale of the land (edged in black on Appendix B of the report of the Head of Property Services) to Hardway Sailing Club for the consideration outlined in the report.